4 ms·

If the community demands the ability to review code and data then the usage of closed data sets will simply decrease until they comply. We should not base our s

by Cerium 10y ago

If the community demands the ability to review code and data then the usage of closed data sets will simply decrease until they comply. We should not base our standards of research on the ease of complying. We should do what we can to produce the most accurate results.

nickff 10y ago
The problem is not one of convenience, the problem is that you are depriving yourself of huge amounts of valuable (closed) data, and this may cause large gaps in what is researchable.
- eveningcoffee 10y ago
  This was the point. You have to pay the price for the principles and hope that the tide turns one day. If you take your suggested easy route then this day may never come.
  - nickff 10y ago
    My point is that there are large fields where we may not get access to open source data in the foreseeable future; in the meantime, we are depriving ourselves of potentially useful or valuable knowledge. Imagine if you could reduce the number of traffic deaths by analyzing a closed data set from Lyft or Uber; is this worth doing, or should we just tell the PhD candidate not to bother?
  - zmb_ 10y ago
    Are you a researcher and following those principles? Because it is very easy to demand other people pay the price for what you believe are the right principles. The reality of the way research funding and academia is set up (at least in Europe) is that the price you pay is likely your career. You can go through all the work and effort to follow those principles, and all that will happen is that the politicians will give the research funding and tenure positions to competitors that published more and told more exciting stories. Academia and research will necessarily reflect the incentives put in place by the people with the money (i.e., politicians). And right now they are giving money for exciting stories and publication counts. That is where the change must start.
    - eveningcoffee 10y ago
      I did not demand anything. I just explained that when everybody complies, nothing will probably change.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

by Cerium 10y ago

nickff 10y ago

The problem is not one of convenience, the problem is that you are depriving yourself of huge amounts of valuable (closed) data, and this may cause large gaps in what is researchable.

eveningcoffee 10y ago
This was the point. You have to pay the price for the principles and hope that the tide turns one day. If you take your suggested easy route then this day may never come.
- nickff 10y ago
  My point is that there are large fields where we may not get access to open source data in the foreseeable future; in the meantime, we are depriving ourselves of potentially useful or valuable knowledge. Imagine if you could reduce the number of traffic deaths by analyzing a closed data set from Lyft or Uber; is this worth doing, or should we just tell the PhD candidate not to bother?
- zmb_ 10y ago
  Are you a researcher and following those principles? Because it is very easy to demand other people pay the price for what you believe are the right principles. The reality of the way research funding and academia is set up (at least in Europe) is that the price you pay is likely your career. You can go through all the work and effort to follow those principles, and all that will happen is that the politicians will give the research funding and tenure positions to competitors that published more and told more exciting stories. Academia and research will necessarily reflect the incentives put in place by the people with the money (i.e., politicians). And right now they are giving money for exciting stories and publication counts. That is where the change must start.
  - eveningcoffee 10y ago
    I did not demand anything. I just explained that when everybody complies, nothing will probably change.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]